|
Arthurian Articles
Here are some short introductory articles on various aspects of Arthuriana:
The Written Record The trouble with Arthur as a historical character is that there is nothing about him in a written source until at least 300 years after he was thought to have lived. Any historical figure was already obscured by the myth of a heroic chieftain that emerged from a subdued Wales in the early middle ages and completely submerged by the illustrious Arthur of Britain established by Geoffrey of Monmouth in the twelfth century. To gain an insight into the historical background, we must study the source material. There isn't much. Here are the sources in chronological order:
Gildas, a British monk, wrote his Ruin of Britain just before 550 AD. He reports the advances of Saxons, the destruction and desertion of cities and the near defeat of the Britons. They were saved by Ambrosius Aurelianus, Gildas says, a leader of Roman descent. According to Gildas the Saxons were defeated at Badon Hill and from the way he writes it is implied that Ambrosius was the leader there. Gildas says that this took place in the year of his birth, sometime between 500 and 510.
Bede, an Anglo Saxon monk, wrote his Ecclesiastical History the English People around 730 AD. Bede obviously uses Gildas as a source and has Ambrosius Aurelianus as the British leader at Badon, which he identifies as Bath.
A Welsh monk, previously identified as one Nennius, mentions a great leader in the Historia Brittonum (around 830 AD). This leader defeats the Saxons in 12 battles the final one being Badon. This leader, according to Nennius, is Arthur, mentioned for the first time.
Annales Cambriae was an annual calendar kept up by Welsh churchmen. The manuscript records several centuries including the years of Arthur's supposed career. In the margin notes were made about any notable events which took place in a year. These notes occur every ten or so years. Badon, with Arthur as victor is recorded, as is Camlann where Arthur's death is recorded. This was written it is thought in the tenth century.
This is thin, isn't it? Can archaeology shed brighter light on the Arthur of history?
The Archaeological Record Not specifically. Archaeology is not generally a science which can be used to investigate individuals, unless of course you have the bones. Archaeology sheds light on the past by establishing patterns and has helped confirm what little there is in the literature about Arthur's time.
Much painstaking work has produced a map of hundreds of fifth and sixth century Teutonic pagan grave sites across England. Unfortunately, although the evidence does show a spread of graves, as if the Germans slowly pushed their way westward, evidence of that movement is often patchy and sometimes contradictory. There is also no evidence of any pitched battles. But there was refortification in the fifth century of hill forts, as if the Britons were preparing to defend themselves. Also Roman coinage and mass produced pottery is not in evidence after the beginning of the fifth century, confirming that trade broke down. Cities were abandoned, some in the early fifth century but others remained market centres into the sixth century.
So archaeology suggests that pagan, Teutonic culture established itself on England's East coast in the early to mid fifth century and made halting and uneven progress westwards. But the invaders only achieved notable victories against the British in the west 150 years later (at battles near Bath in 577 and Chester in 613). So it took our Germans a great deal longer to complete the victory over the British than it did the Germans on the continent ‑ about 100 years longer. Why the hold up? Were there not so many of them as there were invading Gaul? Or were they content to sit peacefully on the eastern seaboard? Or were they not as fierce as their continental compatriots?
An intriguing and currently fashionable conjecture is that there was no Teutonic invasion, but the Britons decided to take up German ways of their own accord (the way that we have chosen to drink Coke and eat McDonalds). This would explain the halting spread of the fashion for grave goods and the lack of battle‑site evidence. (But if this was the case why did Gildas write about the Saxon assaults within living memory of them happening?)
Or could it be that the Germans were as keen on conquest as their continental brothers but were opposed successfully for a period by a great British warrior leader? An Arthur.
Foreground or Fairground? Many modem scholars (of varying ability) allege there is an actual person at the heart of the legends, though not a king with a band of knights in shining armour. Ashe suggested that the British ruler Riothamus, may have been the real Arthur. Michael Wood follows Gildas and Bede in preferring Ambrosius Aurelianus as Arthur. Other writers have offered alternative candidates including the Roman commander Lucius Artorius Castus; the Prince of Dumnonia, Artognou; Welsh prince Owain Ddantgwyn and the Scottish Prince Artúr MacAedan of Dalriada.
Another modem phenomenon is the fashion for finding evidence of Arthur in particular areas of the country. Alistair Moffat for instance has found him in Kelso (Arthur and the Lost Kingdoms, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1999). W. F. Skene in the late nineteenth century found him on Hadrian's Wall. Norma Lorre Goodrich found him there again a hundred years later. Littleton and Malcor found him with a bunch of Sarmartian warriors in Lancashire (From Scythia to Camelot, Garland, 2000). Even serious scholars have found Arthur in the most unusual places. John Morris, author of a text book on the dark ages The Age Of Arthur (Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1973), offered Colchester as Camelot. Colchester's Roman name was ... Camulodonum.
Even those finding Arthur in his traditional heartlands of Wales and Cornwall cannot agree. See for instance Blake and Lloyd's The Keys to Avalon (Element, 2000), Gilbert, Wilson and Blackett's The Holy Kingdom (Corgi, 1999) and Barber and Pykitt's Journey to Avalon (Blorenge, 1993).
The Mediaeval Heyday The Arthurian literary tradition is at least a thousand years old. Arthur as a great warrior chief in Welsh sagas like Armes Prydein (10 century?) and Culhwch and Olwen (11th century?) came first. These strange tales were sung or chanted in Wales only, for in the beginning he was only a local hero. Arthur's international fame began with Geoffrey of Monmouth's History of the Kings of Britain (1138?) ‑ the publishing sensation of the 12th century. The Arthur whose tale dominated a full third of this book was a much grander figure than his previous incarnations.
Those hearing the tales, Norman lords and ladies in Britain first then France and then beyond, were spellbound for the tale of Arthur's life has the pace and verve of a modern thriller. In the 1180s Chretien de Troyes wrote a series of tales with Arthur's court as the backdrop to love stories, one which introduced Lancelot and his adultery with Guinevere. This set a trend which barely slackened for 250 years with Arthur appearing in countless romances across Europe, either as the doyen of European chivalry or an emperor brought down by passion and betrayal.
This phenomenon culminated in Thomas Malory's huge compendium of the adventures of Arthur and his court, Le Morte DArthur. This was published by Caxton's printing press in 1485, within three weeks of the battle of Bosworth, that traditional hinge of history between the mediaeval and the modem. From then, as the glamour of mediaeval chivalry faded so did Arthur's literary glory. Books and plays were still produced but in dwindling numbers until the revival in mediaevalism at the beginning of the nineteenth century.
Modern Revivals When Le Morte DArthur was republished early in the nineteenth century Peacock, Swinburne and William Morris were stimulated to write on Arthurian themes. But all other images were dwarfed by the giant presence of Tennyson's Arthur as he appeared in the Idylls of the King. From the 1850s until the Great War the Arthur of literature was Tennyson's Arthur, with the Victorian fashion for chivalry giving Arthur's downfall more resonance than we can imagine. So powerful a hold did Tennyson's Arthur have on public imagination that when his reputation foundered after the Great War Arthur himself fell into a decline.
A children's book revived flagging interest. T. H. White's The Sword in the Stone (1938) introduced a young Arthur to children and his scatty Merlyn replaced Tennyson's tormented bard. The book's continued success into the 1950s coincided with a renewed interest in Arthur as a historical figure. The several fascinating contributions of Geoffrey Ashe to the debate in the 1960s strengthened this revival and influenced many novelists and subsequently film makers. Ashe was also partly instrumental in associating Arthur with New Age ideas which emerged in the cultural maelstrom of the 1960s. These two strands, the historical Arthur and mystical figure of Celtic legend have been the basis of literally hundreds of plays and novels since 1960. Children's writers like Susan Cooper and Rosemary Sutcliffe have been joined by feminist writers such as Marion Zimmer Bradley, fantasy genre books like those of Stephen Lawhead and historical fiction such as that of Mary Stewart and Bernard Cornwell.
The Arthurian Mythos has ornamented our history since the earliest times. Arthur's might had already passed into folk memory in the late 6th Century; a possibly contemporary poem, Y Gododdin praises a fallen warrior, Gwarwthur, but adds that 'he was no Arthur'. The Welsh bards sang of the prowess of Arthur and his companions ‑ for example, the strange, fragmented journey to the otherworld by Arthur and his company in his ship 'Prydwen' described in the 9th Century poem, The Spoils of Annwn', or the raw and bizarre Culhwch and Olwen probably composed about 1100 AD, which includes the chase of Twrch Trwyth, the human turned boar which ranges over Ireland, Wales, Brittany and Cornwall. Arthur passes into national and European mythology with Geoffrey of Monmouth. In Geoffrey's History of the Kings of Britain Arthur's conception at Tintagel is contrived by Merlin, his sword Caliburn is forged on the isle of Avalon, he achieves an astonishing victory over the Saxons at the siege of Badon Hill, defeats the Romans, is betrayed, reaches the final showdown at Camlann and retires to Avalon. The Arthurian ideal has emerged at critical times in our history, reflecting contemporary issues: Malory's le Morte DArthur written during the Wars of the Roses, Tennyson's Idylls of the King written at the zenith of the British Empire, T. H. White's pacifist Once and Future King, strongly influenced by the second world war and many modem works incorporating modem themes such as feminism (e.g. Marion Zimmer Bradley, The Mists of Avalon) or science fiction (e.g. C. J. Cherryh's Port Eternity). And no one should underestimate the power of legend ‑ one of the great turning points in English history was the victory of Henry Tudor over Richard III at Bosworth Field. Henry, the 'son of prophecy', led his troops to victory under the Red Dragon, an iconic figure from the Prophecies of Merlin, from Geoffrey of Monmouth's version of the legend. Henry's first son who, but for an early death, would have ascended the throne, was called Arthur.
Most folk tales of ancient heroes are narrowly located. Even as powerful a figure as Robin Hood is confined to Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire. Folk tales about Arthur, on the other hand, are in the same category as tales of dragons, St George and the devil; found across the country associated with scores of precisely identified localities. If Geoffrey of Monmouth created a pan British figure who fought his battles across Britain, many talespinners borrowed Arthur's glamour for local glory. How else could Alderley Edge in Cheshire, South Cadbury in Somerset and Tintagel all claim him? But this association with local folklore pre dates even Geoffrey. We know, for instance, that two tors on Bodmin Moor carried his name a generation before Geoffrey wrote. The earliest ever mention of Arthur (the ninth century Historia Brittonum) contains two 'wonders' both of which attach stories to landscape features; one near Rhyadar in Mid-Wales and the other possibly at Wormelow Tump in Herefordshire. Some local folk tales appear to have been accommodated in political literature. In the twelfth century, when the Norman and Plantagenet kings were taking over monastic lands several pseudo historical accounts were produced by clerics associated with particular Welsh churches claiming ancient rights to the land. Several of these include tales of Arthur, precisely associated with the founding saint of the local church. And the nineteenth century idea that folk tales were remnants of pagan animistic rituals still clings to Arthur. He has been the Bear (The Welsh Arth), the Chough (in Cornwall), the Boar (the hunter of a great boar in several early tales), and always, completely, forever... the Pendragon.
Arthur came late to the cinema screen. The two earliest full length movies were American versions of Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee at the Court of King Arthur, (1930 and 1948). Then, during the early 1950s, several films were produced with Arthurian themes, which had lots of swordplay and emphasised good in all its forms winning out. Ava Gardner as Guinevere in the 1952 Knights of the Round Table epitomises this. She casts the odd glance at Lancelot but no more. From the late fifties there was a dearth of Arthurian films until John Boorman's Excalibur (1980). Some think this is the 'best' Arthurian film. Richard Gere, as a matinee idol Lancelot, has the best of both worlds, remaining a loyal friend of Arthur and an enthusiastic adulterer as well. This film also features use of the supernatural that came to dominate cinema and TV versions of Arthur until the turn of the century. This approach, where wizardry is at the foot of all skulduggery, at least gave the opportunity for women to take leading roles in Arthurian films for the first time. Actors such as Helen Mirren featured as wicked Morgans in several films ‑ a far cry from the saintly Ava. Jerry Bruckheimer's 2004 King Arthur was a disappointment. Clive Owen as a Sarmatian Arthur was leaden. But the film had the virtue of a realistic narrative, rather than relying on wall eyed hags casting spells to drive the plot forward. And Arthur's bride (Keira Knightly) was neither saint nor witch, but a sling wielding warrior.
Comics, Games, Societies and the Heritage Industry Arthur was introduced in the colourful, then new, form of the comic strip in America in the 1930s, at the same time as the new breed of US superhero including Superman and Batman. The most successful and long lasting Arthurian strip was Hal Foster's Prince Valiant. This trend strengthened in the nineteen fifties when comic book lines such as DC and Marvel had several Arthurian characters among the hundreds of story lines. This colourful, adventurous approach to Arthur was incorporated into the fantasy genre in the renewed interest in all things magical in the 1970s. King Arthur, Excalibur and others were featured frequently in commercial versions of fantasy role playing games. And now computer games include many titles referencing Arthurian themes. Arthur has also been the inspiration for many societies (The Pendragon Society being the most illustrious). Frederick Glasscock's 1930s Fellowship of the Order of the Knights of the Round Table was based at Tintagel and met in a stunning hall built for the purpose, which you can still visit. At the other end of the scale is the rather less grand King Arthur's Krewe, a club contributing a float to the annual New Orleans Mardi Gras, Welcome to the Krewe of King Arthur! Many youth groups have also taken chivalrous ideals from Arthurian tales and moulded them to attract young people ‑ the most successful being the Scout movement, which Baden‑Powell, partially at least, based on Round Table ideals. There are also a growing band of councils, with an eye to their tourist trade, claiming with varying degrees of front that Arthur was one of their previous council tax payers. These include Flintshire (with its Arthurian library at Mold), Shropshire (with a gaudy claim that Roman Wroxeter was Camelot) and several other Welsh local authorities. Other enterprises such as The Arthurian Centre in Cornwall (www.arthur-online.co.uk) and English Heritage at Tintagel however try to explain a region's place in the development of the Arthurian stories by presenting a clear distinction between history and legend.
|
.
© pendragonsociety.org pendragon59.subs@btinternet.com